Reading with System

In the novel The Land of all Evil reading is a process and means first dissecting sentences and metaphers to words and then reintegrating the words into (new) relationships. Reading can follow a system, too. Körner gives a very good example in his reading notes of Shakespeares Richard III in the Fragment of the Book Fourth Box.

The reader should intensively and deliberately read the text material “in mental and physical activity”. To read physically means to perceive each sentence, each word individually, without regard to grammar, punctuation, structure, i.e. to break every sentence into words, metaphors into its individual components. To read mentally means to reload the gained individual parts with meaning and to reassemble them in the right proportion (for the text created by the reader). Körner understands this intensive reading activity as “ensembling”. At the same time, the reader should follow his own ideas, e.g. arrange the material anew, experimentally.

If you want to follow Körners reading system for his Shakespeare findings you might click the following link: Reading system for Shakespeares Richard III

Influence of The People (das Volk) in the GDR

Before choosing a fragment, there is a kind of preface called Robust Mandate for the reader and a selection entitled Comparison of Draft and Final Version of a Law (called Direktive). Click on the second selection Entwurf mit Direktive to get a photo animation. You see the author Thomas Körner comparing the wording of a draft with the final directive issued.

Dieses Bild hat ein leeres Alt-Attribut. Der Dateiname ist Thomas-Körner-beim-Lese-Vergleich-von-Entwurf-und-Direktive-300x206.jpg
Comparison word by word

Before any decision on a legislative directive a draft was formulated which could then have undergone further changes after a (national) debate.
In Art. 21 § 2 the Constitution of the German Democratic Republic of 1968 gives the citizens of the GDR the opportunity to prove their will in plebiscites. However, the competence to conduct a referendum is at the discretion of the People’s Chamber (Article 53). Article 65 (3) introduced the procedure of a so-called popular (public) discussion, which had already been practiced before the adoption of the new constitution. In a public debate the draft would have been discussed within selected professional circles.

Körner proves how comprehensively the professional groups have used their rights of co-determination: no changes in content have been made, only in syntax. Instead of a semicolon they put a comma, the word “until” was replaced by a hyphen, the term “strength” was replaced by the “strengthening”. So actually there was no public debate.

Make your own decision: Entwurf mit Direktive